Refinement Techniques for Animated Evolutionary Photomosaics Using Limited Tile Collections

  • Shahrul Badariah Mat Sah
  • Vic Ciesielski
  • Daryl D’Souza
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6025)


An animated evolutionary photomosaic is produced from a sequence of still or static photomosaics to evolve a near match to a given target image. A static photomosaic is composed of small digital images or tiles, each having their own aesthetic value. If the tiles are prepared manually, the tile collections are typically small. This potentially limits the visual quality of a photomosaic as there may not be sufficient options for matching tiles. We investigate the use of colour adjustment and tile size variation techniques via genetic programming to improve the animated photomosaics. The results show that colour adjustment improved both visual quality and fitness. However, it can produce strange looking tiles. Tile size variation was able to focus on details in the target image but produced slightly worse fitness values than an equal-sized tiles approach. Combining these techniques revealed that, regardless of the size of tiles, colour adjustment was the dominant refinement. In conclusion, each of these techniques is able to produce an aesthetically different animation effect and presents a better mechanism for generating photomosaics when only a limited number of tiles is available.


Non-photorealistic rendering animated evolved photomosaic evolved art genetic art genetic programming digital art 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Tran, N.: Generating photomosaics: An empirical study. In: Proceedings of the 1999 ACM symposium on Applied computing (SAC 1999), pp. 105–109. ACM, New York (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Silvers, R., Hawley, M.: Photomosaics. Henry Holt and Company, Inc., New York (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ciesielski, V., Berry, M., Trist, K., D’Souza, D.: Evolution of animated photomosaics. In: Giacobini, M., et al. (eds.) EvoWorkshops 2007. LNCS, vol. 4448, pp. 498–507. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wijesinghe, G., Mat Sah, S.B., Ciesielski, V.: Grid vs. arbitrary placement of tiles for generating animated photomosaics. In: Proceeding of Congress of 2008 Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2008). IEEE Service Center, Piscataway (2008) (NJ 08855-1331)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim, J., Pellacini, F.: Jigsaw image mosaics. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 21, 657–664 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orchard, J., Kaplan, C.S.: Cut-out image mosaics. In: Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on Non-photorealistic animation and rendering (NPAR 2008), pp. 79–87. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Di Blasi, G., Gallo, G., Maria, P.: Smart ideas for photomosaic rendering. In: Proceedings of Eurographics Italian Chapter Conference 2006, Eurographic Association, Catania, Italy (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Finkelstein, A., Range, M.: Image Mosaic. In: Hersch, R.D., André, J., Brown, H. (eds.) RIDT 1998 and EPub 1998. LNCS, vol. 1375, pp. 11–22. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim, J., Nah, H., Yoon, K.: The Decorative PixMosaics: using directional photo tiles. In: Proceedings of the Computer Graphics, Imaging and Vision: New Trends (CGIV 2005). IEEE Computer Society, China (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang, Y., Nascimento, M.A., Zaiane, O.R.: Building Image Mosaics: An application of content-based image retrieval. In: ICME 2003: Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME 2003), vol. 3. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park, J.W.: Artistic Depiction: Mosaic for Stacktable Objects. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2004 Sketches SIGGRAPH 2004. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yan, X., Liu, H., Yan, J., Wu, Q.: A Fast Evolutionary Algorithm for Traveling Salesman Problem. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Natural Computation (ICNC 2007), pp. 85–90. IEEE, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liang, K., Yao, X., Newton, C., Hoffman, D.: A New Evolutionary Approach to Cutting Stock Problems With and Without Contiguity. Computers and Operations Research 29(12), 1641–1659 (2002)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mat Sah, S.B., Ciesielski, V., D’Souza, D., Berry, M.: Comparison between genetic algorithm and genetic programming performance for photomosaic generation. In: Li, X., Kirley, M., Zhang, M., Green, D., Ciesielski, V., Abbass, H.A., Michalewicz, Z., Hendtlass, T., Deb, K., Tan, K.C., Branke, J., Shi, Y. (eds.) SEAL 2008. LNCS, vol. 5361, pp. 259–268. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Trist, K.: Untitled 2008 animated mosaic (still), Project Space Spare Room, RMIT, Melbourne (2008), (accessed November 2, 2009)
  16. 16.
    Woodwark, J.R.: The Explicit quad tree as a structure for computer graphics. The Computer Journal 25, 383–390 (1982)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shahrul Badariah Mat Sah
    • 1
  • Vic Ciesielski
    • 1
  • Daryl D’Souza
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and Information TechnologyRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations